Could have been a lot better

Rating: 6/10 (23 November 2002)

I wanted to like this film a lot, being a bit of a fan of the post-apocalypse genre.
Unfortunately it doesn't start well at all. There is no adequate explanation of the reason for the creation of the virus at the lab. The lab appears civilian rather than military, which given the nature of the virus is highly unlikely.
The virus given it's effects, method of transmission, apparent 100% infection rate after transmission and near instantaneous incubation time would have level 3 (possibly 4) biohazard containment at the lab. What we see in the film (a metal swipe card door which didn't look airtight and readily openable cages for infected animals) doesn't come close.
Security at the lab (even assuming it is civilian) is unrealisticly lax. The lab technician even calls security to alert them giving a partial location to no apparent effect.
How at least one of the infected or the infected chimp actually gets out of the lab to infect the rest of the UK also isn't dealt with. Given their reduced intelligence, lack of transport, obvious infected appearance and alerted lab security, for one or the chimp to get out seems unlikely (though given the lax security maybe not).
We never learn how the rest of the UK actually gets infected so rapidly to the point that civilisation collapses within 28 days. Given the limited number of infected, their reduced intelligence, lack of transport, the method of transmission and the obvious appearance of the infected it is very difficult to imagine how the infection could spread quickly (particularly initially when there are few infected) and out of localised areas as the infected are apparently reliant on walking. Any uninfected person on seeing an infected person is going to try to escape from or kill an infected and inform the authorities who are very likely to quarantine the entire area. We can only assume the initial response of authority was as lax and ineffective as the lab security.
Assuming you can suspend disbelief regarding the above what follows is a film of two halves. The first is good and the deserted London is well done, in particular the street scenes. The lack of bodies seems odd, presumably the limited filming time windows on the streets didn't allow time for them to be placed.
I thought the scene at the Jim's parents house on finding his parents was particularly moving.
Unfortunately the film nosedives in the second half when the characters try to leave London. The decision to use the tunnel and continue to use it on finding it blocked is ridiculous. As is Jim's decision to investigate a deserted transport cafe. The characters seem to want to expose themselves to other unnecessary risks too.
The motorways seem peculiarly free of abandoned vehicles and the motorway in front of the blockade is unaccountably so.
The decision to dispose of Frank by getting him infected in a particularly unlikely manner seemed uninspired, since I felt he was one of the better characters.
The soldiers were with the exception of the Major and Sergeant horribly stereotyped caricatures. The idea that military discipline could slip so much so rapidly extremely implausible, again like so much of this film. Some of the soldiers dialogue was very unconvincing and unrealistic. I think the less said about this part of the film the better.
The ending gives the impresssion of being tacked on. As I believe it was following test audience reaction to the original ending.
Overall a film of interesting ideas that could have been made a lot more plausible in various ways and could have been a lot better.